Quote Originally Posted by Presence333 View Post
I may be blind with disillusionment,
but I see every single solution humanity thinks of to generate the amount of electricity/power that humanity craves as inevitably bound for disaster.

Personally I don't mind disaster so long as I have enough time to adapt, but if I'm going to put the idea of A.I. into the neat lil category of good and bad...I've got to say bad because it:
A) adheres to the plan of consuming energy for no good reason
2) humanity hasn't figured out how to not destroy everything.
3. because I watched Terminator

...and A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001).
Let me address these issues one at a time then.

1. Life exists for no reason, anyways. As Joe Rogan put it, we're here to eat the sandwich. Besides, you keep acting like if we consume energy, there won't be any left eventually or the planet will suffer. This is only true about fossil fuels. If we tapped into any of the millions of sources of renewable energy that exist both on the planet and off the planet there would be no damage done (except for the potential of what could be done with this energy)

B: Humanity will never figure out how to not destroy everything. Once we figured out how to destroy everything, that was it. You can't just roll back the upgrade.

III - Any fox news conscript will reveal how apathetic and dissociated people are already becoming. We already live in a planet where children are being murdered for the sake of greed and a small group of families are setting themselves up to win a war of attrition against the rest of the planet. If anything, at this point AI might bring some more humanity to the equation than currently exists. Hell, maybe a robot rebellion would even the playing field a little.